August 2017 - Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] including Pillar in Pharo image by default

by Stephane Ducasse

Let us rephrase it: - I would like to have a mini pillar with a simplified model and visitor to display class comments. - then think about Pharo 70 as the core and birth of a new generation of imageS I will restart to revisit Pillar once I'm done with the Lecture at Prague. Stef On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to propose including Pillar in the Pharo image by default. > > My reasoning: > > Since we are moving to git, and most people will use github, gitlab, and the likes, it is expected to include a README.md file (or possibly more extensive documentation) alongside the code. > > Which means that people will (and are) writing the README mostly by hand, which of course is problematic, as e.g. code snippets can get deprecated, screenshots become outdated, etc. > > As Pillar tries to address these problems, it would make sense to me to include Pillar in the image by default, as anyone using git (which eventually should be everyone) will most likely benefit from writing their documentation in Pillar. > Similarly using Pillar would open an avenue to provide the documentation in-image, e.g. one exporter for html/markdown, and another one for Pharo's Help system. > > I could, of course, install Pillar every time, but considering thats extra effort and in the extra time I can fix the issues by hand, I don't have such an incentive to use Pillar for this. > > Questions & Problems: > > I don't know by how much would pillar increase the image size. Perhaps there could be (a) "lightweight Pillar" (that would include just pillar & markdown exporter), or (b) we would have different images for different uses. > > By different images I mean something along the lines of > a) developer image - meant to be directly used by developers to create their software > b) production image - as a foundation for running systems / users > > Does this make sense? > > Peter >

Aug. 11, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] including Pillar in Pharo image by default

by Cyril Ferlicot D.

Le 11/08/2017 Ã 18:52, Peter Uhnak a Ã©crit : > Hi, > > I would like to propose including Pillar in the Pharo image by default. > > My reasoning: > > Since we are moving to git, and most people will use github, gitlab, and the likes, it is expected to include a README.md file (or possibly more extensive documentation) alongside the code. > > Which means that people will (and are) writing the README mostly by hand, which of course is problematic, as e.g. code snippets can get deprecated, screenshots become outdated, etc. > > As Pillar tries to address these problems, it would make sense to me to include Pillar in the image by default, as anyone using git (which eventually should be everyone) will most likely benefit from writing their documentation in Pillar. > Similarly using Pillar would open an avenue to provide the documentation in-image, e.g. one exporter for html/markdown, and another one for Pharo's Help system. > > I could, of course, install Pillar every time, but considering thats extra effort and in the extra time I can fix the issues by hand, I don't have such an incentive to use Pillar for this. > > Questions & Problems: > > I don't know by how much would pillar increase the image size. Perhaps there could be (a) "lightweight Pillar" (that would include just pillar & markdown exporter), or (b) we would have different images for different uses. > > By different images I mean something along the lines of > a) developer image - meant to be directly used by developers to create their software > b) production image - as a foundation for running systems / users > > Does this make sense? > > Peter > Hi, I know that Stephane want to includes a light version of Pillar in the image. Currently he is working on a way to remove Magritte dependency from Pillar. Another step would be to get a minimal parser not relying on PetitParser. This parser would parse only a subset of the Pillar syntax that can be used for writing class comments. If this subset is defined (I we have the list of all Document Items we want to understand), I can give a try to make this light parse. -- Cyril Ferlicot https://ferlicot.fr http://www.synectique.eu 2 rue Jacques PrÃ©vert 01, 59650 Villeneuve d'ascq France

Aug. 11, 2017

including Pillar in Pharo image by default

by Peter Uhnak

Hi, I would like to propose including Pillar in the Pharo image by default. My reasoning: Since we are moving to git, and most people will use github, gitlab, and the likes, it is expected to include a README.md file (or possibly more extensive documentation) alongside the code. Which means that people will (and are) writing the README mostly by hand, which of course is problematic, as e.g. code snippets can get deprecated, screenshots become outdated, etc. As Pillar tries to address these problems, it would make sense to me to include Pillar in the image by default, as anyone using git (which eventually should be everyone) will most likely benefit from writing their documentation in Pillar. Similarly using Pillar would open an avenue to provide the documentation in-image, e.g. one exporter for html/markdown, and another one for Pharo's Help system. I could, of course, install Pillar every time, but considering thats extra effort and in the extra time I can fix the issues by hand, I don't have such an incentive to use Pillar for this. Questions & Problems: I don't know by how much would pillar increase the image size. Perhaps there could be (a) "lightweight Pillar" (that would include just pillar & markdown exporter), or (b) we would have different images for different uses. By different images I mean something along the lines of a) developer image - meant to be directly used by developers to create their software b) production image - as a foundation for running systems / users Does this make sense? Peter

Aug. 11, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo 6.0 and 6.1 64 bit freeze on MacMini

by TedVanGaalen

.. hard to imagine I am the only one with this problem? -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-6-0-and-6-1-64-bit-freeze-on-MacMini-tp4957969p… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Aug. 11, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo 6.0 and 6.1 64 bit freeze on MacMini

by TedVanGaalen

thanks for you reply, Esteban well, I can still use Pharo 5 in the mean time, no problem. how/where should I forward this to vm-dev? Regards, have a nice holiday! Ted -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-6-0-and-6-1-64-bit-freeze-on-MacMini-tp4957969p… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Aug. 11, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo 6.0 and 6.1 64 bit freeze on MacMini

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 11 Aug 2017, at 13:48, TedVanGaalen <tedvga(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > since 1.8.2017 there was no response, did already anyone thought/worked to > solve this problem? > Thank you, > Ted not yet. Iâm on holidays so I cannot test anything. in a couple of weeks, maybeâ¦ but Iâm guessing this is a VM problemâ¦ maybe someone on vm-dev can help here? Esteban > > TedVanGaalen wrote >> Very very wild guess: it could have to do with GPU<-> Open GL? <-> Pharo >> call time out issues because the Intel HD 4000 GPU is working at its >> (officially allowed) upper performance limits with 3840 x 2160 at 30 Hz >> refresh rate (maximum). >> OTOH however: >> 1. I am not a GPU Guru.. >> 2. It works flawlessly with Pharo 5.0 and before. >> 3. All other macOS applications also work OK. >> >> If it is a VM issue, Squeak would have the same problem >> but I don't want to spend time to try this as well. >> >> TedvG > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-6-0-and-6-1-64-bit-freeze-on-MacMini-tp4957969p… <http://forum.world.st/Pharo-6-0-and-6-1-64-bit-freeze-on-MacMini-tp4957969p…> > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com <http://nabble.com/>.

Aug. 11, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] VM dev and compilation

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 11 Aug 2017, at 12:08, Bruno Durin <bruno.durin(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have been tinkering with Pharo and Squeak for a few weeks and I am very enthusiastic with these great pieces of software! I would like to ask questions to check my understanding. I am refering from time to time to Squeak as it runs on the same VM as Pharo but my questions are focused on Pharo. > > As an exercice to learn, I am trying to compile Pharo VMs and get the VM simulator run in a Pharo image (first a 32-bit image+VM and later a 64-bit image+VM). > I am doing this both under Ubuntu 14.04 LTS and Mac OS X 10.12.6. > What I succeeded in doing: > - compiling the squeak and pharo VM using the state of their respective git repo as of about 20 July 2017: on Mac both 32 and 64 bits, on Linux only 64 bits (mainly because I did not want to spend the time to fix the 32-bit libraries which do not coexist well with their 64-bit counterparts) > - on Mac, generating the VM development image (SpurVMMaker) for Squeak on top a (32 bits) V5 image, launch it and run the VM simulator, > - on Mac, generating the VM development image (generator.image) for Pharo on top of a (32 bits) V5 image, launch it and starting to run a CogVMSimulator (which currently fails, but I am debugging it and learning along the way.) > > So, my questions: > 1) About the Pharo VM compilation (Below "the" Pharo VM means the official VMs that are published on the Pharo website but if VM developers use a different process between 2 releases I would be happy to know the differences.) > a) is it correct that the Pharo VM is built using the github pharo-vm repository? yes and no. - the officially distributed pharo-vm is built on opensmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm and published into our servers. - we keep pharo-vm (in which opensmalltalk-vm is a subtree) repo as a CI/testing platform (that produces the ânightly-builtâ VMs from files.pharo.org/vm/nigthtly-builds <http://files.pharo.org/vm/nigthtly-builds>), but this is used just for testing results, etc. the VMs that people should use are produced in the main repository. > b) in the pharo-vm tree, is it correct that "build" and "results" directories are remnant of the build process before Pharo reunited with Squeak on opensmalltalk vm and that the builder classes in the generator.image (PharoVMSpur32Builder and co) do not create the build.sh script in the "build" directory any more. yes. > c) is it correct that the Pharo VM is now built with the pharo.cog.spur (for example) make process in the various build sub-directories of the "opensmalltalk-vm" directory? yes. > 2) When running a Pharo VM compiled on Mac, the GUI was noticeably slower that the official VM downloaded from pharo.org <http://pharo.org/>. (I compared running the official image.) I did not see such slow down when compiling a Squeak VM. My educated guess is that it is related to libcairo and dependencies. Are there compiler optimisations that I should have manually added? Should I generate a XCode project with cmake and compile in XCode (I currently use ./mvm make script)? I have not had this problem under Linux. no. I have no idea why you have a slower UI but - it is not related to cairo since standard pharo does not use it (just athens does) - you should not need to do anything manually (besides executing ./mvm -f) - you do not need to generate an Xcode project eitherâ¦ > 3) On Mac, is the difference between having the plugins as Mach-O bundle in Squeak and as dylib libraries in Pharo only a packaging choice or does it have deeper implications? (Does it change for example the way FFI is done?) it's just a packaging choice. > 4) Do I understand well that currently the simplest way to convert a 32-bit image to a 64-bit one is to use Spur32to64BitBootstrap class in a VM development image? (As far as I understand, the other way is to use SystemTracer.) yes. I donât even know if it is *possible* with system tracer right now :) > A remark: when manually compiling a Pharo VM in the pharo-vm repo following Eliot's instructions, the updateSCCSVersions script does not work (because it is one level down with respect to the top of the git tree as compared to the opensmalltalk-vm repository). I eventually understood that the correct build procedure is in the travis scripts but as I do not know well the CI tools, it took a long time before I thought of looking into these scripts. If pharo-vm is used to build the Pharo VM (see question 1.a) I think it would be good to update the build process in README.md in pharo-vm tree (and I can do it). yes, thatâs right :) cheers, Esteban > > Thanks, > Bruno > >

Aug. 11, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] FLSerializer in Pharo 6.1

by jb

No, that cannot be the problem. The following works without problems: | working stream | working := FileSystem disk workingDirectory. stream := (working / 'foo.txt') writeStream. stream nextPutAll: 'Hello World'. stream close. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/FLSerializer-in-Pharo-6-1-tp4959960p4959973.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Aug. 11, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] FLSerializer in Pharo 6.1

by webwarrior

jb wrote > Hi everyone, > > the FLSerializer in Pharo 6.1 doesnât work. I tried the example from the > class comment and I always get > > FileException: cannot open file: example.FL. > > Is that a known problem? > > Johannes Probably that's because you don't have write permission in working directory. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/FLSerializer-in-Pharo-6-1-tp4959960p4959964.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Aug. 11, 2017

FLSerializer in Pharo 6.1

by Johannes Brauer

Hi everyone, the FLSerializer in Pharo 6.1 doesnât work. I tried the example from the class comment and I always get FileException: cannot open file: example.FL. Is that a known problem? Johannes

Aug. 11, 2017